A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Role of fusion of prone FDG-PET and magnetic resonance imaging of the breasts in the evaluation of breast cancer. | LitMetric

The purpose of this study is to report further about the statistically significant results from a prospective study, which suggests that fusion of prone F-18 Fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) breast scans increases the positive predictive value (PPV) and specificity for patients in whom the MR outcome alone would be nonspecific. Thirty-six women (mean age, 43 years; range, 24-65 years) with 90 lesions detected on MR consented to undergo a FDG-PET scan. Two blinded readers evaluated the MR and the computer tomography (CT) attenuation-corrected prone FDG-PET scans side-by-side, then after the volumes were superimposed (fused). A semiautomatic, landmark-based program was used to perform nonrigid fusion. Pathology and radiologic follow-up were used as the reference standard. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy (with 95% confidence intervals) for MR alone, FDG-PET alone, and fused MR and FDG-PET were calculated. The median lesion size measured from the MR was 2.5 cm (range, 0.5-10 cm). Histologically, 56 lesions were malignant, and 15 were benign. Nineteen lesions were benign after 20-47 months of clinical and radiologic surveillance. The sensitivity of MR alone was 95%, FDG-PET alone was 57%, and fusion was 83%. The increase in PPV from 77% in MR alone to 98% when fused and the increase in specificity from 53% to 97% were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The false-negative rate on FDG-PET alone was 26.7%, and after fusion this number was reduced to 9%. FDG-PET and MR fusions were helpful in selecting which lesion to biopsy, especially in women with multiple suspicious MR breast lesions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00927.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fusion prone
8
fdg-pet
8
prone fdg-pet
8
magnetic resonance
8
role fusion
4
fdg-pet magnetic
4
resonance imaging
4
imaging breasts
4
breasts evaluation
4
evaluation breast
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!